Warlord and Tactical Shift

[Skyscraper]

Question: If the creature attacks the ally with a ranged power and the ally shifts to an adjacent square to the enemy, does the ally make OA?

I would say yes.

I think that the argument that the attack has occurred but not the hit, is unfounded. There is nothing in the rules to support that the attack and a hit (or the attack and a miss) are two different sequentially occurring events and that while the attack still occurred, only the hit could be interrupted. A hit is an attack that successfully damages an opponent, but it's still one and the same event IMO even if, at the game table, we sequentially roll two dice.

So in the end, the warlord would indeed move an ally next to his opponent who, by using a ranged power, would provoke an OA. I don't see any far-reaching consequences to ruling this power in this way, you simply give an ally a basic attack in some circumstances (ranged attack from opponent, ally is within a few squares from opponent) while other warlord powers give basic attacks to ally in any circumstance. The benefit of this power is that you both move your ally in addition to him eventually benefitting from an OA if the circumstances are appropriate.

Sky

 

[JGulick]

Umm--nothing here would negate the attack, unless you manage to kill the monster in one blow with your OA. A monster can make a ranged attack against you if you're adjacent just as easily as if you're 1 + (warlord's Int bonus) squares away.



Wait, what? When the heck did we start talking about Combat Challenge?



I think you're overestimating the reach of this rule's repercussions. Once a round, IF you're attacked by a bad guy with a ranged attack AND if he's within 1 + your warlord buddy's Int bonus squares AND your warlord buddy is within ten squares of you, you can charge the enemy (flavorful description here, not talking about the charge action) and thwack him. He still gets his attack unless he's dead, which (unless you know he's a minion) is significantly chancier than the possibility of running behind a piece of cover or total cover nearby.

We're talking about CC because we're talking about the timing rules for triggering Interrupts. There's only one rule.

I have no problem with negating the attack by any means (moving out of range, out of line of effect, whatever); that's what Interrupts do. I have a problem with ignoring the timing order specified by the power to say it allows OAs when the power can't be itself triggered until too late for OAs to be claimed.

If you make a ruling that this Interrupt power can go back and allow OAs (i.e., other Interrupts, though ones triggered by Attack not Hit) to be claimed after the hit roll is made and declared successful, then why can't other Interrupts like Combat Challenge use the same time-shifting trickery? It does matter. I'd hate to waste my CC on a miss if I can decide to use it too early.

See PHB269... it uses 5 steps to my 3, but it's quite clear that declaring the attacks and target (my 1, PHB 1 and 2) is distinct from an before rolling and announcing the hit (my 2, PHB 3 and 4). Triggering on Attack is triggering on PHB2; triggering on a Hit is PHB4.

 

[Kordeth]

We're talking about CC because we're talking about the timing rules for triggering Interrupts. There's only one rule.

I have no problem with negating the attack by any means (moving out of range, out of line of effect, whatever); that's what Interrupts do. I have a problem with ignoring the timing order specified by the power to say it allows OAs when the power can't be itself triggered until too late for OAs to be claimed.

The text in the book is vague, and I'm not going to argue whether the book says you can or can't. I'm just saying I would allow it, because it's an unusual and clever use of a power that doesn't come up very often.

If you make a ruling that this Interrupt power can go back and allow OAs (i.e., other Interrupts, though ones triggered by Attack not Hit) to be claimed after the hit roll is made and declared successful, then why can't other Interrupts like Combat Challenge use the same time-shifting trickery? It does matter. I'd hate to waste my CC on a miss if I can decide to use it too early.

1) I have absolutely no problem with players knowing the effects of an action before they use their interrupts. In fact, my usual style at the table is something like: "*Roll* He hits you with a 19, fighter Bob."

2) How is making a CC attack against an enemy that missed you "wasting" your CC, unless you're sure you can kill the monster with one hit? It's still a free attack.

 

[vhailor]

I think the ally would... no, should get OA.
Just look at it realistically and leave the words the book uses aside. In most situations it is very difficult to seperate the attack and hit actions. So, what happens here? The warlord sees the arrow leave the bow, going straight to your friend, and in these fractions of a second it takes to reach the target, he directs his ally to move 20 feet, placing him adjacent to the enemy? Obviously not(well, except if your ally is Flash, and your buddies members of JLA). I imagine the scene is a little different. The warlord sees that the ally is not paying attention to the enemy, who pulls an arrow from his quiver. You shout and disrupt the concetration of your enemy, alerting at the same time your ally, who moves next to the creature managing a hit, before he takes the shot.

Maybe the choice of words the book uses doesn't allow the enemy to attack, but the DM should.

 

[DracoSuave]

1.Tactical Shift
Daily ? Martial
Immediate Interrupt Ranged 10
Trigger: A creature hits your ally with a melee or a ranged attack
Effect: The ally can shift a number of squares equal to 1 + your Intelligence modifier.

Question: If the creature attacks the ally with a ranged power and the ally shifts to an adjacent square to the enemy, does the ally make OA?

No. The opportunity to interrupt with an opportunity attack has passed at that point.

2. A Warlord (or any other character) acts before an ally and gives a bonus to the ally until the end of the Warlord's next turn. The ally's turn comes and he uses the benefit given by the warlord. If the warlord chooses to Delay, and the ally's turn comes again, does he gain the bonus again, or it doesn't apply anymore? If it does, would the ally benefit from the bonus from Warlord's Favor again in this turn?

No, because when you delay, any effects that are beneficial to the delayer or detrimental to the delayer's enemies that would last until the end of the delayer's turn cease. Any effects that are bad for the delayer, or good for the delayer's enemies, on the other hand, are -not- ended; saving throws are not made.

 

[JGulick]

1) I have absolutely no problem with players knowing the effects of an action before they use their interrupts. In fact, my usual style at the table is something like: "*Roll* He hits you with a 19, fighter Bob."

2) How is making a CC attack against an enemy that missed you "wasting" your CC, unless you're sure you can kill the monster with one hit? It's still a free attack.

Let me try to make it a little more obvious why this is a major power-up for this power.

Let's make the attack a Ranged Burst.

It goes off in the middle of the party, everyone is hit for damage.

The Warlord moves the Great Weapon Fighter out of the burst (he is no longer damaged) and adjacent to the original attacker.

The smack is laid down, the original attacker falls. Unlikely? Not really... every opponent falls to an attack eventually, why not this one?

Now, suddenly *no one* was ever hit by the burst, because the burst didn't happen.

So now a warlock power that is meant to save one person has saved multiple persons. In fact, it can now save the warlock himself, even though he's explicitly not his own Ally.

And you've created a "grandfather paradox" not normally possible in the Interrupt world... you've allowed a power that targets on someone being hit to not just make them be missed, it makes the attack retroactively never have happened, which means the hit certainly didn't happen. And no, don't even try to deny that the rules on PHB269 are "not strict order of steps". They couldn't be clearer.

Not necessary, not supported by the RAW, and a power-up on a power that really doesn't need any help to be quite useful.

 

[Nail]

I would say yes.

I think that the argument that the attack has occurred but not the hit, is unfounded. There is nothing in the rules to support that the attack and a hit (or the attack and a miss) are two different sequentially occurring events ....

Look over page 269 of the PH, under the box "Making an Attack". Make an attack roll is step #3. Determine whether you hit or miss is step #4. Deal damge and apply other effects is step #5. These are sequential events in the rules.

The interupt from the Warlord Utility 10 power "Tactical Shift" happens after the attack roll has been made, and after the hit has been determined. That's what this means:

A creature hits your ally with a melee or a ranged attack.

The power can't be used until your ally is hit. Once your ally is hit, the enemy has already attacked; therefore no OA when your ally shifts next to him.

 

[angrymiguel]

I have a question about a similar situation. I hit a Wizard with an attack, then he uses "shield" to gain +4 AC/ref. Can I respond with elven accuracy to reroll the hit or is it too late?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Let me try to make it a little more obvious why this is a major power-up for this power.

Let's make the attack a Ranged Burst.

It goes off in the middle of the party, everyone is hit for damage.

Bursts aren't Ranged attacks; they're Close or Area attacks. A power that goes off in the middle of the party and hits everyone for damage will be a Close or Area power; the Warlord's ally has thus not been hit by a Melee or Ranged attack, and Tactical Shift cannot trigger.

-Hyp.

 

[Danceofmasks]

I have a question about a similar situation. I hit a Wizard with an attack, then he uses "shield" to gain +4 AC/ref. Can I respond with elven accuracy to reroll the hit or is it too late?

Sure, you can reroll, but against the now higher number.